Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you seriously asking why people on the right extending all the way to the center-left (aka almost everyone), are viscerally against giving others a list of stuff they didn't earn, even though there are good arguments against it?

Answering for myself (from the center-right), I'm in favor of most of the things you listed, but against student loan forgiveness. I get the feeling student loan forgiveness is what you're really asking about. I'm against it because taking out student loans was a gamble that was taken with full information and a path to success. People bet on themselves, sometimes that doesn't go smoothly, but they should keep trying, not get bailed out.

Question: As a country, we obviously need physicians, scientists, farmers…. whatever list seems reasonable to you. Do you feel that the best way to get the best candidates for whatever jobs you view as essential is for 18 year olds to “bet on themselves” and while also prioritizing the options of potential students who have wealthier families? I’m not so sure that assuming enormous debt and “gambling” is the best way to get the best students into these jobs.

I’m not arguing in favor of loan forgiveness— although I’d probably support it once I had the chance to read the fine print. I am thinking that kids with savvier and wealthier families may get “bailed out” in multiple ways, multiple times. People without those supports often don’t. And either way, I’m wondering what the best ways might be to ensure that we end up with the best brain surgeons and neonatologists.

I’m OP and the only way student loans and college cost affect me is that we will strongly encourage our kids to look at higher education outside the United States. I don’t think education should ever be something the individual has to figure out how to finance and make a market analysis and risk calculation when they are 17/18. It also can’t be pushed onto the kids if their parents are not financially savvy. This makes it harder to have the class mobility Americans claim that they have, if parents aren’t a finance whizz, then the kid is at a disadvantage and that carries over.

I’m however more concerned about American work culture, especially hustle culture. There needs to be more emphasis on balance and life outside of work, and this shouldn’t make you poor.

I quite agree with you. (PP)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you seriously asking why people on the right extending all the way to the center-left (aka almost everyone), are viscerally against giving others a list of stuff they didn't earn, even though there are good arguments against it?

Answering for myself (from the center-right), I'm in favor of most of the things you listed, but against student loan forgiveness. I get the feeling student loan forgiveness is what you're really asking about. I'm against it because taking out student loans was a gamble that was taken with full information and a path to success. People bet on themselves, sometimes that doesn't go smoothly, but they should keep trying, not get bailed out.

Question: As a country, we obviously need physicians, scientists, farmers…. whatever list seems reasonable to you. Do you feel that the best way to get the best candidates for whatever jobs you view as essential is for 18 year olds to “bet on themselves” and while also prioritizing the options of potential students who have wealthier families? I’m not so sure that assuming enormous debt and “gambling” is the best way to get the best students into these jobs.

I’m not arguing in favor of loan forgiveness— although I’d probably support it once I had the chance to read the fine print. I am thinking that kids with savvier and wealthier families may get “bailed out” in multiple ways, multiple times. People without those supports often don’t. And either way, I’m wondering what the best ways might be to ensure that we end up with the best brain surgeons and neonatologists.

I’m OP and the only way student loans and college cost affect me is that we will strongly encourage our kids to look at higher education outside the United States. I don’t think education should ever be something the individual has to figure out how to finance and make a market analysis and risk calculation when they are 17/18. It also can’t be pushed onto the kids if their parents are not financially savvy. This makes it harder to have the class mobility Americans claim that they have, if parents aren’t a finance whizz, then the kid is at a disadvantage and that carries over.

I’m however more concerned about American work culture, especially hustle culture. There needs to be more emphasis on balance and life outside of work, and this shouldn’t make you poor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Americans seem so viscerally offended by the idea of someone receiving something they didn't work for."

"Something" has to come from somewhere. It doesn't spring from nowhere. Justice and fairness is important to Americans. It's not about being offended. But you are free to work as little as you'd like. No one will prevent you from moving to a cabin in the woods by a pond, and it's a legitimate choice.

One of your comments I found particularly bizarre... "leisure time and vacations looked down upon." I have no idea what you're talking about. Americans lead rather leisurely lives compared to most of history.

In addition to the moral hazard and cultural metastasis, it also this it is the element of government force (directly or indirectly) that rankles. People have less of an issue with charity than with government redistribution programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you seriously asking why people on the right extending all the way to the center-left (aka almost everyone), are viscerally against giving others a list of stuff they didn't earn, even though there are good arguments against it?

Answering for myself (from the center-right), I'm in favor of most of the things you listed, but against student loan forgiveness. I get the feeling student loan forgiveness is what you're really asking about. I'm against it because taking out student loans was a gamble that was taken with full information and a path to success. People bet on themselves, sometimes that doesn't go smoothly, but they should keep trying, not get bailed out.

Question: As a country, we obviously need physicians, scientists, farmers…. whatever list seems reasonable to you. Do you feel that the best way to get the best candidates for whatever jobs you view as essential is for 18 year olds to “bet on themselves” and while also prioritizing the options of potential students who have wealthier families? I’m not so sure that assuming enormous debt and “gambling” is the best way to get the best students into these jobs.

I’m not arguing in favor of loan forgiveness— although I’d probably support it once I had the chance to read the fine print. I am thinking that kids with savvier and wealthier families may get “bailed out” in multiple ways, multiple times. People without those supports often don’t. And either way, I’m wondering what the best ways might be to ensure that we end up with the best brain surgeons and neonatologists.

I’m OP and the only way student loans and college cost affect me is that we will strongly encourage our kids to look at higher education outside the United States. I don’t think education should ever be something the individual has to figure out how to finance and make a market analysis and risk calculation when they are 17/18. It also can’t be pushed onto the kids if their parents are not financially savvy. This makes it harder to have the class mobility Americans claim that they have, if parents aren’t a finance whizz, then the kid is at a disadvantage and that carries over.

I’m however more concerned about American work culture, especially hustle culture. There needs to be more emphasis on balance and life outside of work, and this shouldn’t make you poor.

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that so many Americans, especially on the right wing but also center and center-left, are so viscerally against the idea of someone receiving something basic that they didn't "earn"? Of all the terrible things in society, why is this the thing that generates so much outrage?

When it's about any left wing or moderately left policy - student loan debt forgiveness or free college, a public health system, a nationally higher minimum wage, family leave and childcare, public housing, the increased unemployment payouts over the pandemic, people like to mock these ideas and call them "free stuff" and "entitlements" for people who haven't earned them, as if that's some horrible thing.

I am not even arguing that I am in favor of every single one of these left ideas. There are valid criticisms of whether these things can be implemented soundly and whether we can configure a tax structure, without loopholes, that would pay for them, and whether as the assumed "world police" we can afford to reduce our military budget enough to have the social programs of the levels of other countries. There are obviously logistical criticism of any large scale government program in such a huge country being implemeneted from scratch.

But rhetorically, Americans seem so viscerally offended by the idea of someone receiving something they didn't work for... and this is almost always about low income people receiving something, and not about corporations that lie, cheat, and steal every day (or at the very least deceive, manipulate, and rig the system every day). Why is it so offensive that somebody receives a home if you don't think their low income job means they didn't work hard enough for it? Furthermore, there is an attitude that glorified suffering, like "I had to work 80 hour weeks and suffer to get into the middle class, so you should too." Is it that crazy to want things to get better and easier for future generations? Is it offensive to your great uncle who died of polio that the polio vaccine was created and people don't have it anymore? Wasn't the innovative vision of the future supposed to be a world where automation and technology makes things easier, so less labor is needed to provide for the world, and people could have more leisure time? Instead, work productivity has doubled, more or less, and work weeks and work days have gotten longer.

I'll also say that I'm not a Communist. I don't agree with state control or everything and government-appointed roles for people. I am American by marriage, not by birth, and still, some ideas are foreign to me. Why is leisure time and vacations looked down upon? even if it's just spending time with your family, caring for children or the elderly? Why is this devalued in favor of work?

Wouldn't it be better for everyone, for the environment especially, and for health, if we all just worked LESS, and produced less, consumed less? I think so many of the problems and needs that are especially prevalent in America are connected with overworking. So maybe it's not the end of the world if people receive food, healthcare, and shelter without having to "earn" it?

It's because Republicans hate poor people who don't look like them. That's all there is to it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you seriously asking why people on the right extending all the way to the center-left (aka almost everyone), are viscerally against giving others a list of stuff they didn't earn, even though there are good arguments against it?

Answering for myself (from the center-right), I'm in favor of most of the things you listed, but against student loan forgiveness. I get the feeling student loan forgiveness is what you're really asking about. I'm against it because taking out student loans was a gamble that was taken with full information and a path to success. People bet on themselves, sometimes that doesn't go smoothly, but they should keep trying, not get bailed out.

Question: As a country, we obviously need physicians, scientists, farmers…. whatever list seems reasonable to you. Do you feel that the best way to get the best candidates for whatever jobs you view as essential is for 18 year olds to “bet on themselves” and while also prioritizing the options of potential students who have wealthier families? I’m not so sure that assuming enormous debt and “gambling” is the best way to get the best students into these jobs.

I’m not arguing in favor of loan forgiveness— although I’d probably support it once I had the chance to read the fine print. I am thinking that kids with savvier and wealthier families may get “bailed out” in multiple ways, multiple times. People without those supports often don’t. And either way, I’m wondering what the best ways might be to ensure that we end up with the best brain surgeons and neonatologists.

Anonymous wrote:Are you seriously asking why people on the right extending all the way to the center-left (aka almost everyone), are viscerally against giving others a list of stuff they didn't earn, even though there are good arguments against it?

Answering for myself (from the center-right), I'm in favor of most of the things you listed, but against student loan forgiveness. I get the feeling student loan forgiveness is what you're really asking about. I'm against it because taking out student loans was a gamble that was taken with full information and a path to success. People bet on themselves, sometimes that doesn't go smoothly, but they should keep trying, not get bailed out.

Anonymous wrote:Somebody has to produce that to which people become entitled. If the entitlement mentality become too societally diffuse and inculcated, you start to decline. In individual cases it may not apply or make sense, but in the aggregate, that ethic is what keeps the capitalistic juggernaut engine going.

There, gave it a shot.